ARUN KUMAR SAXENA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ARUN Tandon, J. This bunch of special appeals is directed against the common judgment and order of the Hon'ble Single Judge dated 24. 10. 2003 passed in a bunch of writ petitions, leading being Writ Petition No. 32066 of 2001.

(2.) WE have heard Sri R. N. Singh and Ashok Khare Senior Advocates assisted by Sri V. K. Singh and G. K. Malviya Advocates as well as Sri A. K. Gupta Advocate on behalf of the appellant-promotees. Sri Shashi Nandan Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anoop Trivedi Advocate on behalf of the private respondents-direct recruits as well as Standing Counsel on behalf of the State respondents.

(3.) SCHEDULE 'a' to the 1967 Rules discloses the sanctioned strength in the cadre of Excise Inspector as 205. Rule 7 of the 1967 Rules conferred a power upon the Excise Commissioner to determine the number of candidates to be recruited from each of the 3 sources specified in Rule 5. In deciding the number regard was to be had to the relative number of promoted and directly appointed persons in the cadre of the service and in any case not more than 10 per cent of the candidates to be recruited in any one year were to be recruited by promotion each from sources (b) and (c) respectively, if suitable candidates were available.